Same-Sex Marriage Will Not Lead to Polygamous Marriage. Really?

[Cryozombie]

Despite the fact that I am for allowing Same-sex marriage, in seven pages of threads no one has been able to Refute Bill's point...

Proponents of Same Sex Marriage Said that everyone who argued against it because it would be used as a "gateway" into other forms of (I hesitate to use the term, but I will by means of Illustration only, not personal belief) Aberrant Marriage were full of crap, it would never happen have been proven incorrect as that argument is exactly what this Mormon group is doing.
​

 

[Empty Hands]

Despite the fact that I am for allowing Same-sex marriage, in seven pages of threads no one has been able to Refute Bill's point...
​

Did you miss my post? Anyone can claim any grounds they want for a lawsuit, and proponents of same-sex marriage have no control of that. Someone could claim that laws against animal cruelty necessitate marrying their goldfish, and that wouldn't make those against animal cruelty for bestiality. The point will only be relevant if the lawsuit is upheld. It certainly doesn't make the proponents liars or deceptive in their arguments, since again they have no control over what one individual claims as grounds in a lawsuit.

 

[Cryozombie]

Did you miss my post? Anyone can claim any grounds they want for a lawsuit, and proponents of same-sex marriage have no control of that. Someone could claim that laws against animal cruelty necessitate marrying their goldfish, and that wouldn't make those against animal cruelty for bestiality. The point will only be relevant if the lawsuit is upheld. It certainly doesn't make the proponents liars or deceptive in their arguments, since again they have no control over what one individual claims as grounds in a lawsuit.

Completely Understandable. But it still doesn't change the facts.

Group A: "If this is allowed, this will happen"

Group B: "Hogwash thats just plain Stupid, it will never happen."

Group C: "Hey now that this has Happened, this should be allowed as well"

Group A: "See, we told you."

Group B: "What? Don't blame us! How could we have known?!"

Say what you want, spin it how you like, but that is exactly what's going on. Bill is Correct about that. Like I said, I am all for Same Sex Marriage... I'd vote for it no Problem... but I also won't delude myself into believing that Precedent doesn't matter when other groups want to make a Challenge, and I would accept the responsibility for their actions as well.

 

[Empty Hands]

Group A: "If this is allowed, this will happen"

Group B: "Hogwash thats just plain Stupid, it will never happen."

Group C: "Hey now that this has Happened, this should be allowed as well"

Group A: "See, we told you."

Group B: "What? Don't blame us! How could we have known?!"

Say what you want, spin it how you like, but that is exactly what's going on.

But it hasn't actually happened. So the criticism is misplaced. I don't think anyone ever said "If gay marriage goes through, no one will ever want to use it in their argument for polygamy." What they said was one won't lead to the other in actuality, not in some random person's argument/lawsuit.

 

[Cryozombie]

Yeah, I dunno, sounds like splitting hairs to me.

Personally, If this were in the U.S. I'd accept the fact that I support Same Sex Marriage and as a result, I have helped set precedent that can be used to Justify claims for other types of "unusual" Marriages.

If others want to deny that so be it, after all it is the American Way to place blame squarely on the other guy. *shrug*

 

[Kacey]

Despite the fact that I am for allowing Same-sex marriage, in seven pages of threads no one has been able to Refute Bill's point...

Proponents of Same Sex Marriage Said that everyone who argued against it because it would be used as a "gateway" into other forms of (I hesitate to use the term, but I will by means of Illustration only, not personal belief) Aberrant Marriage were full of crap, it would never happen have been proven incorrect as that argument is exactly what this Mormon group is doing.
​

I've said the same thing twice: there is no way to prove that those wishing to legalize polygamous marriages ONLY came forward because of the same-sex marriage issues. It is possible - even likely - that the timing of their current push is related to the issue of same-sex marriage - but there's no way to prove that it wouldn't have happened anyway.

 

[Blade96]

Despite the fact that I am for allowing Same-sex marriage, in seven pages of threads no one has been able to Refute Bill's point...

Proponents of Same Sex Marriage Said that everyone who argued against it because it would be used as a "gateway" into other forms of (I hesitate to use the term, but I will by means of Illustration only, not personal belief) Aberrant Marriage were full of crap, it would never happen have been proven incorrect as that argument is exactly what this Mormon group is doing.
​

I dont care to try to refute it. My voice is simply so what if people said this wouldnt happen and it did. so what? Personally Bush saying there was those weapons in iraq and they didnt find none - now thats a lie worth crowing about. not this.

 

[Cryozombie]

I've said the same thing twice: there is no way to prove that those wishing to legalize polygamous marriages ONLY came forward because of the same-sex marriage issues.

That is not the argument put forth, however, so I fail to see your point.

If they had simply shown up and said "Hey we want this" that's one thing, and Id agree with you. Them saying "Hey you allowed this, so why not us" is a completley different argument.

 

[shesulsa]

Comparing marriage law to gun law is ... just ignorant, though I understand the slippery slope axiom.

1. History has proven the ill effects of polygamous marriage and polygamous societies as noted in the article and evidenced in compounds in Utah.

2. History has NOT proven the ill effects of homosexual marriage nor relationships except that everyone's Catholic Pucker Factor seems to increase exponentially when faced with the prospect that some of those relationships they just can't seem to kill will actually become defended by law.

3. Back to the weapons laws analogy ... reducing the size of legally purchased, open-carry weapons is somewhat understandable when we look at violence and how it has managed to become reduced with some legal intervention (though I worry about too much restriction). Including homosexuals into marital union law just makes sense in the same fashion - and since marriage affords some very specific rewards, there can be no reward for marrying a sheep ... or a couch ... or a warm, damp towel for that matter.

I'm not terribly worried that polygamous marriage will become legalized anytime soon, so long as we keep the Mormons (or Catholics or any other specific group - including old, rich, white men in the energy business) from overtaking the most powerful seats in government (uh oh - too late on the old white dudes).

There is less of a link between gay marriage and polygamy than there is with heterosexuality and polygamy.

 

[Cryozombie]

I'm not terribly worried that polygamous marriage will become legalized anytime soon, so long as we keep the Mormons (or Catholics or any other specific group - including old, rich, white men in the energy business) from overtaking the most powerful seats in government (uh oh - too late on the old white dudes).

There is less of a link between gay marriage and polygamy than there is with heterosexuality and polygamy.

I don't think that is what Bill was Arguing. I think Bill was arguing everyone said that link was preposterous and no one would use it, now someone has.